Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2006;114:2619-2626
Published online before print November 20, 2006, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.660043
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
114/24/2619    most recent
CIRCULATIONAHA.106.660043v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Albert, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ridker, P. M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Albert, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ridker, P. M
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Related Collections
Right arrow Pathophysiology
Right arrow Risk Factors
Right arrow Epidemiology

(Circulation. 2006;114:2619-2626.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.


Epidemiology

Impact of Traditional and Novel Risk Factors on the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Incident Cardiovascular Events

Michelle A. Albert, MD, MPH; Robert J. Glynn, PhD; Julie Buring, ScD; Paul M Ridker, MD, MPH

From the Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention, Donald W. Reynolds Center for Cardiovascular Disease Research and the Leducq Center for Cardiovascular Research, Divisions of Cardiovascular Diseases and Preventive Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston Mass.

Correspondence to Dr Michelle A. Albert, Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston MA 02115. E-mail maalbert{at}partners.org

Received August 22, 2006; revision received September 27, 2006; accepted September 28, 2006.

Background— Persons of lower socioeconomic status have greater cardiovascular risk than those of higher socioeconomic status. However, the mechanism through which socioeconomic status affects cardiovascular disease (CVD) is uncertain. Virtually no data are available that examine the prospective association between novel inflammatory and hemostatic CVD risk indicators, socioeconomic status, and incident CVD events.

Methods and Results— We assessed the relationship between 2 indicators of socioeconomic status (education and income), traditional and novel CVD risk factors (high sensitivity C-reactive protein, soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1, fibrinogen, and homocysteine), and incident CVD events among 22 688 apparently healthy female health professionals participating in the Women’s Health Study. These women were followed up for 10 years for the development of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, coronary revascularization, and cardiovascular death. More educated women were less likely to be smokers; had a lower prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity; and were more likely to participate in vigorous physical activity than less educated women. At baseline, median total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, triglyceride, C-reactive protein, intercellular adhesion molecule-1, fibrinogen, and homocysteine levels for women in 5 categories of education (<2 years of nursing education, 2 to <4 years of nursing education, a bachelor’s degree, a master’s degree, and a doctoral degree) and 6 categories of income [≤$19 999, $20 000 to $29 999, $30 000 to $39 999, $40 000 to $49 999, $50 000 to $99 999, and ≥$100 000) decreased progressively with increasing education or income levels (all P<0.001), whereas an opposite pattern was observed for high-density lipoprotein (P<0.001). Overall, in age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, the relative risk of incident CVD events decreased with increasing education (1.0, 0.7, 0.5, 0.4, and 0.5; P for trend <0.001) and income (1.0, 1.0, 0.9, 0.7, 0.6, and 0.4; P for trend <0.001) categories. In multivariate models that assessed the impact of traditional and novel CVD risk factors on the relationship between education/income and CVD events, the relative hazard of incident CVD associated with a 1-category-higher level of education changed from 0.79 in age- and race-adjusted analysis to 0.89 in fully adjusted analysis. The 11% lower risk per 1 category of education remained significant (P for trend=0.006), suggesting that controlling for both novel and traditional risk factors could not explain the protective effect of education. A similar analysis for income revealed that its relationship with CVD events was explained largely by these noted risk factors.

Conclusions— In this prospective analysis, we observed a decrease in incident CVD events with increasing levels of education and income. In contrast to the relationship between income and CVD events, the relationship of CVD events with education was explained only partially by traditional and novel risk factors for CVD.


 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
H. M. Krumholz and F. A. Masoudi
The Year in Epidemiology, Health Services Research, and Outcomes Research
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 4, 2007; 50(23): 2254 - 2262.
[Full Text] [PDF]